The Video Game Critic

[QUOTE=JustLikeHeaven]I finally bought Sands of Time a few months ago to see what all the fuss was about.  I popped it in and I instantly thought it was like a next gen Tomb Raider.  Sadly its not like the orginal and its more akin to one of the many many bad Tomb Raider sequels.

Seriously, what were reviewers smoking when they played Sands of Time?  It was the most average game I have ever played.  It didn't do any single thing well.  Yet it did pretty much everything adequately.  I only played Sands of Time for a few hours, but I couldn't stand much more of it.  I highly doubt I will try Warrior Within or Two Thrones.

[/QUOTE]

I recommend Warrior Within if you can get past the childish T&A.  The puzzles are better-designed and the combat system is also improved.  It's no longer your standard move-to-the-next-level design, it's more sandbox in its approach.  Try Warrior as a rental first.

My only problem with the Prince of Persia review is where the critic says Beyond Good and Evil is overrated, but I suppose that complaint belongs elsewhere. I thought a D grade was appropriate. I think F grades only belong on games that are really annoying, and games that are boring should get Ds. Prince of Persia was a snoozefest, but well made, so it deserves a D.

[QUOTE=andrew]Prince of Persia: Sands of Time is an amazing game. Breathtaking graphics, solid animation, solid platforming and no load times; didn't think the PS2 had it in it. An A title for sure. Only complaint is the average combat system and annoying 15 to 20 minute battles overly lengthy battles. The platforming is really what the game is about and its done to near perfection. The sequels while technically good are c- games because ubisoft ruined the franchise by taking a dark side twist to the prince.
[/QUOTE]